Jack Wilenchik questions the operation of the Doppler effect in cosmology, so he comes to the conclusion that one of the most important pieces of evidence about the Big Bang may be wrong, which means that the universe is static, that is, it has no beginning and no end.
THE Progress in Physics In 2022, a provocative study was published in the magazine entitled, according to which the Big Bang did not happen, which also means that our universe is not expanding, but exists in a steady state. The hypothesis comes from Jack Wilenchik, an amateur astronomer and lawyer, who formulated it all based on a critical examination of the Doppler effect.
The Doppler effect, coined by Christian Doppler in 1842, describes how the frequency of waves, including light and sound, changes relative to the observer as the source emitting the waves changes. In astronomy, this effect is realized as a redshift, when galaxies move away from us. This observation is therefore one of the pillars supporting the Big Bang theory, the essence of which is that the universe started from an extremely dense point and has been expanding ever since.
However, Wilenchik sees the weak point in this pillar, since according to him, the relationship between redshift and spatial motion is inherently questionable. He argues that the application of the Doppler effect to cosmology has never been experimentally demonstrated in a way that definitively proves that galaxies are actually moving away from us. By reanalyzing the data from spectrometers (such as the Keck Observatory) and rethinking the tired light model originally proposed by Fritz Zwicky in 1929, Wilenchik proposes an alternative interpretation: photons lose energy while traversing vast cosmic distances (that is, the cause of redshift), without all of this it would refer to the movement and distance of the emitting body.
The essence of the tired light hypothesis, as can be guessed from the above, is that the redshift can occur because light loses energy when it travels through the cosmos.
However, if this is true, then the universe is actually static – that is, it has no beginning and no end, which is completely contrary to the basic understanding of modern cosmology.
Wilenchik’s claims go beyond questioning the Big Bang, and a more radical idea can follow from them: Wilenchik essentially assumes that galaxies and stars are not only relatively independent entities that float in space according to known physical laws, but in his opinion, these objects are a huge , parts of a connected structure that have vortex-like properties – a rotating, spiral shape.
The idea can be traced back to ancient cosmological concepts: in the past, the universe was often imagined as a kind of giant, interconnected spiral. According to this view, all elements of the universe are connected in a dynamic, rotating pattern, while according to the current scientific understanding, objects in space move under the influence of gravity and other physical forces.
It is perhaps obvious that the scientific community regards these claims with considerable skepticism. Critics, such as Stephen Holler, associate professor of physical sciences, argue that the Doppler effect is not just a theory, but a well-established scientific principle that has been demonstrated countless times in fields ranging from astronomy to medical imaging. Holler specifically covers Doppler spectroscopy and its application in astronomy, which helps us understand the chemical composition of stars and planets: Doppler spectroscopy is a method of examining the spectral lines of light emitted by distant celestial bodies and comparing them to those known on Earth. with the spectral lines of chemical substances. If a spectral line shifts (in the form of redshift or blueshift), it provides information about the motion and chemical composition of the celestial body.
According to Holler, it is true that although we cannot be completely sure whether the Big Bang theory is correct, it is currently the best explanation for the origin of the universe. He also adds that the scientific community operates on the basis of the available evidence, and there is currently no data to support that the Big Bang theory is wrong, so he thinks it is important to go in the direction indicated by the evidence and not accept it. alternative explanations that are not supported by reliable evidence.
According to Holler, the observational evidence supporting the Big Bang is robust, coming from several independent studies that confirm the theory’s predictions regarding the age of the universe, the distribution of galaxies, and the background radiation left over from the early universe.
